FACULTY COUNCIL MEETING
3:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 12, 2015
Council Room, 412 Student Union
AGENDA:
1. Roll Call
2. Approval of the April 14, 2015 Minutes
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Special Report:
A. Tolga Durak – Director Environmental Health and Safety
5. The President – Remarks and Comments
6. Report of Status of Faculty Council Recommendations:
President Hargis, Provost Sandefur, and/or Vice Presidents
7. Reports of Standing Committees:
a. Academic Standards and Policies: Barney Luttbeg – Update
Recommendation: Revisions to OSU Policy 2-0701 FEPRA 2.08*
Recommendation: Transition to an online Student Survey Instrument for Course
Evaluations*
b. Athletics: Tom Royer - Year End Report
Athletics: Tom A. Royer – Year End Report
Faculty Council
Athletics Committee
End of Year Summary, 2014 – 2015
Submitted by Tom A. Royer, Chair
Committee Members: Tom A. Royer Chair, Dennis Bertholf, Kevin Fite, Meredith Hamilton, Edward
(Ted) Kian, Marilyn Middlebrook, Nathan Walker, Timm Bliss, Chad Depperschmidt
On October 29, 2014, Dr. Marilyn Middlebrook, Associate Athletics Director for Academic Affairs and
Director of Academic Services for Student-Athletes (ASSA) gave the committee a tour of the Joe &
Connie Mitchel Academic Enhancement Center at Gallagher Iba Arena. This was extremely beneficial in
helping the committee understand many of the constraints under which the ASSA operates, as well as
the wide array of assistance provided by the ASSA program.
On April 13, 2015, the Chair (Royer) attended an appeal by a student athlete for an intra-conference
transfer toanother Big 12 institution.
On April 24, 2015, the Athletics Committee met at 1:30 pm in the Joe & Commie Mitchel Academic
Enhancement Center, Gallagher Iba Arena. Attendees: Tom Royer, Nathan Walker, Dennis Bertholf,
Marilyn Middlebrook, Meredith Hamilton (FAR Representative), Ted Kian (COIA representative).
Items for discussion included:
• Review of the Academic Services for Student-Athletes (ASSA) program, directed by Dr. Marilyn
Middlebrook.
• Discussion of a request from the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA) regarding support
for a proposed bill, H.R. 275 which would establish a Presidential Commission on Intercollegiate
Athletics.
• Brief overview of the Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR) meetings (Meredith Hamilton)
• Determine a plan to provide a list of nominees for submission to President Hargis for the
Athletics Council.
• New Business
Dr. Middlebrook provided an overview of OSU’s ASSA with some history on its establishment and
current responsibilities. We discussed the sanctions imposed on OSU by the NCAA over the athletics
program, with the comment that OSU received minor sanctions for those minor violations relative to the
sensational Sports Illustrated series, AND the fact that there was no finding of impropriety with the
ASSA.
Dr. Middlebrook also provided a white paper prepared by the CPA auditing firm Baird, Kurtz & Dobson
(BKD) titled Anatomy of an Academic Fraud (Appendix 1). That report summarized the academic
improprieties at the University of North Carolina, some “Red Flags” that were identified that allowed for
continued fraud to occur, and some Data Analytics that could have been used to identify those “red
flags” preemptively.
Dr. Middlebrook indicated that Oklahoma State’s ASSA program has many of these analytics in place,
either internally or through a regular audit of the program (ca. every 3 years).
Preamble: The 2013-2014 Athletics Committee, at the suggestion of Dr. Middlebrook, recommended to
the Faculty Council that the Athletics Committee review, on an annual basis, the policies, procedures
and practices offered through the office of Academic Services for Student-Athletes (ASSA). This process
should include a review of procedures for counseling, tutoring, and online courses as well as the
communication practices between the coaches and the student-athletes and between the student athletes
and other advising offices across campus. The rationale was that it provides the ASSA with a
documented annual review from a committee of the Faculty Council in the event that individuals or
groups make claims which question the integrity or efficacy of the advising services provided to our
student-athletes. The following is the results of that review.
In general, the committee was quite pleased with the content and detail of the ASSA program. Most of
that information is transparently provided on their website: http://aec.okstate.edu/. We made some
suggestions that we believe would enhance the effectiveness of the website.
• Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC) link: (Web information is not up to date) 2013- 2014
• Link with Academic Affairs: Degree Sheets (Bachelor in University Studies Forms not present)
o Dr. Middlebrook will look into the issue and request correction for the website.
• No College of Agriculture Sciences and Natural Resources Link Degree Sheets.
o Dr. Middlebrook responded that while she loves working the CASNR faculty (because
they actually use faculty to advise students) the lack of a set of degree sheets creates
problems with tracking their athletes credit hours towards graduation. Sometimes such
bookkeeping errors have caused an athlete to lose hours, making the athlete ineligible
for a semester. Dr. Middlebrooks’s office does not have a good way of identifying that
problem and correcting it before they lose eligibility.
With regard to the website, the Athletics Committee believes that the ASSA could more aggressively
promote the “Student” with regard to student athletes and their achievements. We recommend
providing annual reports on the website for:
• Academic performance of athletes
• Course composition of athletics
• Grade modifications requested
• Comparison of student athletes’ academic performance with the general student population
In order to do this, the committee suggests that the ASSA annually update the website and provide
information on the academic achievements of athletes from all sports. Dr. Middlebrook noted that it
requires some effort to keep such items up to date. The committee suggests that Dr. Middlebrook
request some modest funding to hire student workers to keep those items up-to-date on the website, so
that it actually highlights those achievements. The committee also suggested that Dr. Middlebrooks’
program work with University marketing to occasionally develop articles highlighting individual
studentathletes’
academic successes. While it is good to highlight an athlete working in the community or doing
something for charity, it is also important to stress that they are STUDENTS as well as athletes. Some
examples:
• Seven Oklahoma State seniors recently won the prestigious Gerald Lage Award for Big
12 student-athletes. This award is for students who have earned 100 hours or more with
a minimum 3.80 cumulative grade point average. Awardees for 2015 include: Jenna Blumer
(equestrian), Ryan Lester, (football), Janelle Martinez (women’s track & field), Michael
Martin (wrestling), Brittney Reid, (women’s track & field), Paige Wikle (women’s track &
field) and Taylor Woodall (softball).
• OSU has awarded more than 200 Arthur Ashe Jr. Sports Scholar Awards to students of
color who have excelled in the classroom as well as on the athletic field, and 28 were
honored in 2015!
• 48 student athletes were listed on the President’s Honor Roll for spring of 2014 and 55
in the Fall of 2014, meaning they achieved a perfect 4.0 GPA for that semester.
We also recommend that somehow this website can show how the athletic program is compliant with
OSU policies on Diversity. It was suggested that we contact Dr. Lee Bird for more information.
The Athletics Committee will contact Kevin Fite, OSU’s associate director of athletic compliance, with
regard to obtaining an auditing report (Appendix 2).
With financial help from the Provost’s office, a member from our committee (Ted Kian) attended the
2015 National Meeting of the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA). A summary of his
observations and thoughts on how future changes to the NCAA will affect OSU was provided as an
update to the April 24 meeting, with a full report slated to be submitted for the May 13 Faculty Council
meeting. We did discuss the request by COIA to support HR 275 a bill to establish a presidential
commission to examine issues of national concern related to the conduct of intercollegiate athletics, but
decided to wait until the fall to take any action, in part because COIA’s has not yet publicized any official
positions from its 2015 meetings.
We do not yet have names to provide to President Hargis to select someone to serve on the Athletics
Council.
The Chair (Royer) contacted the Chair of the Athletic Council (Dr. James Pappas) in September to get a
better understanding of the role and charge of each of our committees. The Chair of the Athletics
Committee serves as a as a liaison to promote closer relations between these two groups. To date, no
meetings of the Athletic Council were held this academic year, but Dr. Middlebrook indicated that there
was poor communication between Dr. Pappas and others responsible for working with this committee
regarding his elevation to Chair of the Athletics Council (it was his first year for serving on the
committee) and what requirements there were with regard to holding regular meetings. Dr.
Middlebrooks contacted Dr. Pappas and came to the understanding that he will hold regular monthly
meetings next year. However, there is considerable overlap on the purpose of the Athletics Council and
the Athletics committee. We discussed that the Athletics committee function as follows:
• The Athletics Committee chair will serve as the liaison to the Athletics Council and provide a
report on activities to the Faculty Council.
• The Athletics Committee chair will represent the Faculty Council on issues regarding student
athlete academics.
• The Athletics committee will conduct a review of ASSA ‘s program annually.
• At a minimum, the Athletics committee members will meet twice: once in the fall to meet with
Dr. Middlebrook, tour the ASSA facilities and receive feedback on how the committee can assist
with ASSA’s mission and function, and once in the spring to summarize the committee’s review
of ASSA’s program.
• Any additional meetings would be called Ex tempore by the Chair to respond to issues brought
forth by the Athletics Council or other issues regarding athletics and academic issues.
Following that, Chair Royer asked for adjournment, and the meeting was adjourned at 3:00
c. Budget: Pamela Lloyd – Year End Report
Budget Committee of Faculty Council
Annual Report, Academic Year 2014-15
May 7, 2015
For academic year 2014-15, the members of the Budget Committee were as follows: Pamela
Lloyd (Chair, Physiological Sciences), Chanjin Chung (Agricultural Economics), Louise Siddons (Art),
Sandeep Nabar (Accounting), Timm Bliss (Educational Studies), David Biros (Management Science &
Information Systems), Avdhesh Tyagi (Civil & Environmental Engineering), Bill Dare (Finance – OSU
Tulsa), Barbara Miller (Library), Andrea Arquitt (Emeritus Faculty), and Stephen Clarke (ex officio,
Nutritional Sciences).
Issues of interest identified by the committee at the beginning of the year included the use of
carryover funds, guidelines for managing endowments, savings to be generated by moving to a selfinsured model, savings generated by implementation of OK Corral, outsourcing of the motor pool, and
how facilities and administrative (indirect) costs generated by grants and contracts are collected and
utilized on campus. During the course of the year, several guests visited the committee to discuss these
issues.
Vice President for Administration & Finance Joe Weaver attended the February and April
meetings of the committee to discuss the potential impact of the state budget shortfall on the University
and to provide updates on other issues. VP Weaver also updated the committee on the budgetary effects
of the switch to a self-insuring model for faculty and staff health care coverage, the outsourcing of
custodial services, the outsourcing of the motor pool, and the implementation of the block tuition policy.
Construction projects and initiatives such as the raise program were also discussed.
Interim Vice President for Research Sheryl Tucker visited the November meeting of the
committee, along with Interim Associate Vice President for Research Ron van den Bussche and Director
of Grants & Contracts Financial Administration Robert Dixon. Dr. Dixon provided an overview of how
the University calculates and negotiates its facilities and administrative costs (F&A) rate with the federal
government. Drs. Tucker and van den Bussche explained how the collected F&A monies are allocated
across the University and how the model currently in place compares to models used at other research
institutions. Other topics discussed included research infrastructure, the increasing cost of compliance,
and how the University’s effective F&A rate differs from its negotiated F&A rate.
In response to a request from the Budget Committee, Sharon Toy and Kathy Elliott visited the
November meeting of Faculty Council and presented an analysis of cost savings generated by
implementation of the OK Corral purchasing system.
A member of the Budget Committee attended each of the ten college-level FY16 budget meetings
held during December 2014 and January 2015. Special thanks to the following members who volunteered
to attend these meetings and summarize them to the committee: Barbara Miller, Louise Siddons, Chanjin
Chung, Pamela Lloyd, Stephen Clarke, Avdhesh Tyagi, and Sandeep Nabar.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Lloyd, Chair
d. Campus Facilities, Safety, and Security: Nathan Walker – Year End Report
Campus Facilities, Safety, and Security: Nathan Walker – Year End Report 2015
Committee Members:
Stacy Takacs, English OSU- Tulsa; Carol Jones, Biosystems & Agricultural Engineering; Khaled
Mansy, Architecture; Kevin Drees, Edmon Low Library; Charles Leider, Emeriti Association;
Blair Brown and Aaron Sharp, student representatives.
The CFSS Committee would like to thank the following individuals for their assistance:
Ron Hill, Manager Emergency Operations & Preparedness; Tolga Durak, Director,
Environmental, Health & Safety; and Mike Buchert, director of Long Range Facilities Planning
Over the year the Campus Facilities, Safety, and Security Committee reviewed and discussed
several diverse issues. The committee met with Mike Buchert, director of Long Range Facilities
Planning and was informed about current, pending, and future construction on campus. The
Committee organized a meeting between Faculty Council Executive Committee and Committee
Chairs with Ron Hill, Emergency Operations & Preparedness to better understand preparations
in place for any possible campus emergency. The Committee reviewed an older proposal for the
creation and review of Centers and Institutes that involve more than one College (attached);
however, based on several factors it was determined that a proposal such as this is not within the
scope of faculty council action. The Committee also continues to review the issue of portable
heart defibrillators on campus.
GUIDELINES FOR UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE CENTERS AT OKLAHOMA STATE
UNIVERSITY
June 10, 1982
I. Introduction
As Oklahoma State University strives to help meet the needs of Oklahoma, the south-central region and
the nation, there will be continued utilization of centers which contribute to the research, extension and
instruction programs of the University. These centers should serve as focal points to meet the needs of the
state, region, and nation and to achieve the goals and objectives of the University. They should help
coordinate the efforts of individual faculty so that the most sophisticated and difficult tasks can be
undertaken. Centers can constitute a stable and versatile arrangement which can strengthen the total
University effort.
These guidelines relate to research and/or extension centers. The instruction function may be included as
part of any center, and in those instances, the instruction function would be incorporated in such a
proposal. Two types of organizational structure for centers exist at Oklahoma State University. One is a
university organizational structure involving several colleges and the other is a center/laboratory which
may involve one or more departments or colleges focusing on a particular area of interest.
University centers should be organizational structures which involve personnel and equipment from
several colleges and which involve several individual faculty members and/or several groups of faculty
member responsible for specific projects which are consistent with the mission and focus of the center.
The purpose of the formation of such university centers is to coordinate the efforts of a number of
personnel distributed in various colleges and departments in the University to focus on an identified
university-wide thrust. Because of the nature of such centers it is anticipated that few centers with this
university organizational structure will be established at Oklahoma State University.
The most common type of centers/laboratories at Oklahoma State University may involve one or more
departments and/or colleges. These centers are established to help implement programs in particular areas
of interest. The focus of the centers would not be university-wide. However, as the focus and program(s)
evolve, a center could develop a university-wide thrust which would involve personnel and equipment
from a number of colleges and could evolve into the more university center organizational structure after
appropriate review by University administrators. Centers at Oklahoma State University would have no
degree programs or departments, and faculty assigned to these centers would also be assigned to
appropriate academic home departments.
II. Criteria for Establishing Centers
As a general goal, Oklahoma State University should provide a proper balance of quality and breadth of
educational programs within the constraints of available and obtainable resources to meet the needs of
students, industry and society. As a part of their responsibilities, departments, schools and colleges at
OSU may wish to establish centers to achieve certain program objectives. Proposals for such centers
should address the specific criteria as identified below and such proposals should involve adequate input
from department and college faculty and administrators and appropriate University administrators.
Criteria against which judgments should be made for initiating new or discontinuing centers are listed
below:
1. State and National Needs and Priorities
a) Uniqueness of the program to the state, region and nation
b) Extent to which there is a need for the expertise of the programs
c) Extent to which this program is responsible to social and economic conditions prevailing today or
visualized for future years, as determined by current research data
d) Numbers, quality, and status of comparable programs as determined by current research data
e) Extent of the locational advantage of this program at Oklahoma State University
2. Institutional Mission and Priorities
a) Centrality and appropriateness of the program to OSU's institutional mission
b) Extent to which initiating or discontinuing programs contributes to or impacts OSU programs and
priorities in the mission for instruction, research and extension
c) Appropriateness and extent of contribution of the program goals and objectives to the institution's
goals and objectives
d) Extent to which the program fits into the charge of a comprehensive university
3. Program Quality
a) Adequacy of the program in achieving its own program goals and objectives
b) The potential for the program in its environment
c) Quality of support by academic disciplines in assisting in achieving the program goals and
objectives
4. Consideration of Resources
a) Cost effectiveness in relation to similar programs in the state and in the region
b) Adequacy of resources to achieve program goals and objectives
c) Amount of additional resources required to reach and/or sustain an acceptable quality
d) Quality of facilities and equipment necessary to achieve program goals and objectives
e) Adequacy of the current unit operating funds
f) Opportunities and potential for external funding
5. Faculty, Staff and Student Considerations
a) Potential student participation in the program
b) Appropriateness of the participation of the faculty to achieve program goals and objectives
c) Impact of initiating or discontinuing a program on faculty and students
III. College Centers and Laboratories
In the case of centers and laboratories that are located in one academic college or division, the director
will be appointed by the dean of that college. Where one center or laboratory is important to the program
of several colleges or divisions, a memorandum of understanding covering joint participation will be
completed and approved by the deans involved. It is assumed that the centers/laboratories will serve to
enhance and promote the research and/or extension goals of the units they represent. The director of the
center or laboratory will be directly responsible to and submit annual reports to his or her dean or an
appropriate person appointed by the dean. The operation of the center or laboratory, in terms of its
effectiveness and funding, will be the final responsibility of the dean of the college or division wherein
such organizations are located.
A. Personnel
A center/laboratory will be administered by a person (i.e., a director) appointed by the dean. If justifiable,
other associates or assistants may be appointed. Effective administration of the center/laboratory must be
assured through adequate secretarial and clerical personnel as well as technical support. The organization
of each center/laboratory will be tailored by the director and the dean in such a way as to best meet the
mission of the center/laboratory. Personnel involved in the operation of a center/laboratory can include
faculty, adjunct faculty, post-doctorates, professionals, graduate students, technicians, and full or parttime secretarial and clerical help.
B. Standard Operating Procedures
Each center/laboratory will develop written and approved operating procedures at the earliest possible
time. These procedures will include an introduction which outlines the reasons for the existence of the
center, a table of organization, the names of personnel involved in the operation, and job descriptions for
all permanent personnel. The nature and source of the sustaining funds for continuing operation of the
center/laboratory will be documented. A detailed outline of how charges for service to other
organizational units will be determined must also be prepared for audit purposes. Obviously, in some
cases a number of different accounts will be involved in the funding of a unit. Each of these accounts
should be described in terms of the type of support which each account gives to the unit. The physical
facilities and the capital equipment of a center/laboratory should also be listed in the operation procedures
document.
C. Establishing Centers/Laboratories
In order to avoid unnecessary proliferation of centers/laboratories, a basic requirement for their
establishment will be visible funding originating initially either from the dean in whose college the unit
will reside or from funds outside the college (private, state or federal agency). Prior to establishing any
center/laboratory a proposal defining the source or magnitude of funding together with the purpose,
scope, and potential magnitude of effort in the center will be filed with the Deans Council for
informational purposes. Should a potential conflict with an existing center/laboratory be recognized in the
Deans Council and it cannot be resolved, the matter will be referred to the Executive Group for final
decision. Proposals should be available for a suitable review period within the college prior to final
presentation in the Deans Council.
IV. University Centers
University Centers are comprised of faculty members from a number of different colleges or divisions at
OSU. For this reason the director the university center will be selected by and will report to the
appropriate vice president and approved by the Executive Group. These centers will strive to bring
together a number of faculty with expertise pertinent to particular problem area(s) to establish insofar as
possible a broad multidisciplinary unit. The university center director may have several sources of funds
available for the operation of the center. However, potential participating faculty must submit plans which
are approved by their department head and dean before funds are allocated by the director. The university
center director will commit funds for faculty support to the appropriate dean. As noted above, these funds
will only be committed for support of designated faculty as approved on a normal routing sheet. The
director will monitor the expenditures of funds and insure that accounts are not overspent by the colleges.
A. Personnel
Each university center will have a director and other support personnel as needed. The majority of
personnel involved in the pursuits of a university center will be faculty members whose participation in
the program will be coordinated with their dean. In some cases it will be desirable to fund supportpersonnel or consultants directly from university center funds, but professional and technical personnel
will be funded through the appropriate colleges. It is envisioned that university centers could help
coordinate the efforts of several different centers/laboratories to gain the maximum application of effort.
In such cases a memorandum of understanding will be completed by both the university center director
and the deans involved, with the assistance of the office of the appropriate vice president. It will be
possible for adjunct professor and professionals form business, industry, or other organizations or
agencies to be assigned to university centers.
B. Standard Operating Procedures
Each university center will complete an operating procedure manual as rapidly as possible after its
formation. This manual will be comprised of an introduction which states the reasons for the existence of
the center and an organization table, including the names of personnel. Job descriptions of all personnel
will be included. It will also include the method by which personnel will be contacted for possible
participation in the university center and the procedure by which the deans can give their consent for
participation and the procedure by which the deans can give their consent for participation of these
personnel in the university center. Each university center will have an advisory committee which will
consist of faculty members with particular competences in the area of primary importance to the
university center involved. The funding of the university center will be documented in the operating
procedures manual. Normally, several different accounts will be involved, and each of these will be
specified as to the function of the account in sustaining the operation of the university center. The nature
of service for which charges will be made and how charges are to be determined will also be documented
for the audit purposes. In the operation of the university center every effort will be made to maximize
broad, university-wide participation and to insure a smooth and effective coordination of effort among
participating colleges and divisions.
C. Establishing University Centers
University centers must maintain high standards of excellence. Normally a university will maintain only a
few university centers and, therefore, the procedure for establishing such centers must be clearly stated.
These procedures are outlined as:
1. Suggestions for the formation of a university center can come from any source to the University
Executive Group or the Deans Council.
2. A study will then be made to determine if an adequate number of faculty are already involved in
the suggested program area so that a "critical personnel mass" is available. If sufficient personnel
are not available, a cost estimate will be provided for attaining the minimum number of new
appointments necessary for the program to succeed.
3. The study in (2) will be submitted to the Deans Council for its recommendation and then will be
reviewed by the Executive Group to determine if there is University interest.
4. If the Executive Group decides to proceed, key personnel will be interviewed by the appropriate
deans and vice president(s) to ascertain interest in participating. If sufficient faculty wish to
participate, a formal proposal will be prepared for discussion at the Deans Council. The Executive
Group would review the formal proposal and the Deans Council recommendation.
D. Evaluating University Centers
Each university center is to be evaluated every three years, and if it is to be continued, a justification
should be submitted to the appropriate vice president by the center director in coordination with the
appropriate deans. Justification of continuance should be based on achievement of identified objectives
for the center and the criteria identified in Section II.
IV. Summary
Since the purpose of university centers, centers and laboratories, is to enhance all the functions and
capabilities of Oklahoma State University, a cooperative attitude between all units participating in the
University structure is expected. Information should be shared freely among the various units and each
will endeavor to help the others to achieve their mission. This type of cooperative attitude, which already
exists at Oklahoma State University, helps OSU compete with other universities having much greater
funding. If there are questions about the operation of university centers, these questions should be
immediately referred to the Assistant Vice President for Research and/or the Director of University
Extension for investigation. A report would be filed with the Deans Council with suitable
recommendations. Those matters not resolvable in the Deans Council would be referred to the Executive
Group action.
e. Diversity: Sue Jacobs – Year End Report
Diversity Committee
The charge of the Diversity committee is to formulate and recommend policies to administration
regarding the diversity issues on campus. The committee shall particularly monitor and report on the
sources and expenditure of funds related to the recruitment and retention of diverse students, faculty, and
staff, the climate on campus for members of underrepresented groups, and the inclusion of diversity
issues in curricular and non-curricular programs on campus.
This year the Diversity Committee discussed the following topics:






Composition of Faculty Council and University faculty from university ledger by gender,
ethnicity and international status: Presented at FC meeting. Suggest attention be paid to individual
FC committee representation in the future.
Discussed Offensive Trail of Tear Game Day banner; Chair (Piao) attended OSU Pow Wow and
had discussion on FC about Pow Wow being off campus. Invited Chair of NASA to speak about
at FC meeting about Pow Wow, banner, etc; In response Jason Kirksey answered and invited
himself to speak at FC meeting.
Investigated bias incident reporting at OSU, the process and how to make more transparent to
faculty as well as students and staff. Invited Rosalyn Green, EEO, to meeting to discuss current
process and ways to work with administration to make information and process more transparent,
likely involve a link on OSU web page with definitions, directing faculty, staff, and students to
the correct places on campus (work ongoing).
Member Deng represents the Diversity committee in Title IX working group to draft diversity
training module and invited Rosalyn Green and Dr. Tanya Lowery, Title IX coordinator, to
discuss status of Title IX training for faculty and administrators and increased understanding of
both offices’ workloads plus importance of moving forward and working together with FC
Diversity Committee. Dr. Lowery underscored that although online training modules for Title IX
have not yet been approved, she and her staff are available to provide in person training to
departmental and college units; the committee encourages units to arrange for this training. (work
ongoing)
Chair (Jacobs) met with Jeremiah Murray, SGA liaison to Regents at his request to present to FC
resolutions passed by SGA asking for diversity training for faculty and administrators. A
subsequent resolution asking for required diversity training for all students was passed later by
SGA but vetoed by SGA president. Jeremiah requested and was invited to speak to Diversity
Committee about training. (work ongoing to develop/suggest training modules).
Began drafting a diversity climate survey for faculty members to be presented to FC for approval
first meeting Fall 2015 for distribution to faculty soon afterwards (ongoing).
Thank you to the 2014-2015 COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FACULTY COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daqing Piao, Chair (Fall, 2014), Sue C. Jacobs (Spring, 2015)
GENERAL FACULTY MEMBERS:
Lucero "Chelo" Tenorio, Lynne Simpson, Shiping Deng
EMERITUS FACULTY MEMBER:
George Arquitt
STUDENT MEMBERS:
Bailey Betz (SGA), Z. Naddaf (GPSGA) Fall 2014, Latoya Gibbs (GPSGA) Spring 2015
f. Faculty: Karen McBee – Year End Report
Faculty Committee: Karen McBee, Year End Report 2014/2015
Faculty Committee Members: Victor Baeza, Ken Bell, Nurhan Dunford, Pam Lloyd, Sue Jacobs,
Matt Lovern, Karen McBee (chair), Glade Topham, Ron Beer (ex officio).
The Faculty Committee formulates and recommends “policies governing faculty status,
including appointment, tenure, reappointment, dismissal, promotion, … working conditions,
workloads, research activities and similar concerns of the members of the General Faculty.
During the 2014-2015 the Committee considered the following topics:






Addition of University Ombudsperson Ron Beer as an ex officio member of the
committee
Development of a consistent policy across the university on evaluation of administrators
above the level of department head—policy documents from peer universities were
gathered and reviewed, but no draft policy was developed. We recommend that this task
be continued.
Consistency of use of the Annual Faculty Appraisal and Development Program Form
across campus—only one college used a different form.
Policy for faculty titles/descriptions for clinical and other non-tenure track faculty—
Committee determined that policy already exists (Oklahoma State University Faculty
Handbook, Policy Statement 1.5), but may not be followed consistently across
departments and colleges.
Determination if different policies existed among colleges and departments on Faculty
Chairs & Professorships— We worked with chairs of the Diversity and Budget
Committees and some members met with their respective Deans. We learned that there
has been little policy developed on how endowed chairs and professorships are awarded
and maintained and how/when faculty recipients are informed of levels of funding in
their endowments. We encourage the continuing committee to work with university and
foundation officials to develop policy on a minimum set of information to be provided to
recipients of endowed chairs/professorships.
Continued work on revision of OSU P&P 2-0112 Annual Faculty Appraisal and
Development Policy—after revisions having been passed by Faculty Council, this


continues to circulate among this committee, representatives of the Dean’s Council, and
Legal Council.
Initiated revisions of OSU P&P 2-0902 Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Process
for Ranked Faculty—proposed revisions to being 2-0902 and 2-0112 into alignment were
passed by Faculty Council.
Evaluated dossiers of several Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure applicants and
provided advise to the Provost.
g. Long-Range Planning and Information Technology: Victor Baeza – Year End
Report
YEAR-END REPORT: LONG RANGE PLANNING & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(LRP&IT) COMMITTEE-2014 - 2015
Committee Members: Victor D Baeza (Chair), Joe Cecil (Industrial Engineering), Yanqi Wu
(Plant & Soil Sciences), Nicole Sump-Crethar (Library), Jeanmarie Verchot (Entomology &
Plant Pathology), Kieth Teague (Electrical & Computer Engineering), Shelia Kennison
(Psychology), Stephen Clark (Nutritional Sciences)
Appropriate Use Policy (AUP)
Over the summer (2014), members served on various OSU IT committees to review and update
the Universities various AUP policies that were last truly updated and ratified in 1997. The new
policies were reviewed by the Long Range Planning & Information Technology (LRP&IT)
Committee in the Fall and several changes were recommended and made. The new policies
(listed below) were then sent to Legal Counsel, where they remained for the rest of the academic
year. Below is a list of the sections of the policy new proposed policy.









Appropriate Use w/email and social media
Information Security w/incident response and recovery procedures
Data Classification
Risk Assessment
Access Control
Telecommunications
Security Awareness
Server Administration Best Practices
Desktop/Laptop Configuration
Copyright
A copyright information website was created by the OSU Library in the Fall. There was also an
official OSU warning statement for students and faculty that was added to D2L concerning
copyright. The statement (below) is the official OSU Copyright Statement which brings the
University in compliance with the T.E.A.C.H. Act, which provides many accommodations for
the use of teaching material in the online environment.
OSU Copyright Statement
Course materials may not be published, leased, sold to others, or used for
any purpose other than appropriate OSU-related individual or group study
without the written permission of the faculty member in charge of the
course and other copyright holders. This paragraph grants students a
limited license, giving you access to course materials posted on this site
for appropriate OSU-related educational use only. When posting
information, instructors should ensure these materials are not a direct
replacement for a required textbook, coursepack or e-reserves, or digital
library resource. Instructors must also ensure that any converted analog
materials (either audio or video) are not available in a digital format and
that the conversion is authorized and in compliance with copyright law.”
In addition, the OSU Library is in the process of hiring a Scholarly Communications Librarian
who will continue to develop the copyright webpage, assist with Open Access (OA) issues, and
will serve as the copyright specialist for the University.
Office365
A couple of members from the LRP&IT Committee, as well as other faculty recruited through
the committee, have been participating in OSU IT’s trial of Office365. The trial investigated the
viability of switching OSU Faculty and Staff to Office365. The trial ended at the beginning of
May and more information will be announced concerning the possible move to Office365 at a
later time. Among the user benefits for looking at switching to the products are…



50 GB email storage + unlimited online archiving + eDiscovery for each user
OneDrive (1 TB “home drive” storage) for each user
Office web products for mobile devices for each user
Banner Implementation Timeline
OSU IT has been rolling out the new University’s System called Banner. The remaining timeline
for the major Banner applications to be rolled out are…
Finance - 7/2015
Admissions - 7/2015
Human Resources/Payroll - 12/2015
Financial Aid - 2/2016
Registration - 3/2016
Student Accounts Receivable - 6/2016
Degree Works - 10/2016
Several faculty participated in a design meeting that will help IT develop the faculty portals into
the Banner program.
h. Research: Gilbert John – Year End Report
The Research Committee discussed and acted upon the following topics:








Institutional Radiation Safety Policy (#4-0302) – Research committee (RC) supported
changes
Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research (#4-0115)- passed by faculty
council
Annual Federal Debarment and Suspension Background Screening/Inquiry (OSU Policy
and Procedure) – RC supported changes
Henry Bellmon Research Center (HBRC) Space Occupancy Review Policy – RC
supported changes
Complaints of Research Misconduct (#46501)- RC supported changes
Miscellaneous Compensation Payments to Internationals for Independent Personal
Services
(#3-0202)- RC supported changes
Requirement for Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research (#4-0201)- RC
supported changes
RC introduced data and issues pertaining to undergraduate research
Research Committee members:
Chair:
Gilbert John
Members:
Mark Fishbein
Damon Chandler
Suzanne Reinman
Lin Liu
Jeff White
David Lewis (Emeritus)
i. Retirement & Fringe Benefits: Rita Miller – Year End Report
Retirement and Fringe Benefits (R & FB) Committee
Year End Report to the OSU Faculty Council
May 12, 2014
Rita Miller, Chair
Membership.
The Retirement and Fringe Benefits Committee appreciates the dedicated service of its members this
year. Members of this committee were:
Rita Miller (Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Dept), Chair; Richard Wansley (Behavior Science/OSU
Center for Health Science); Valerie McGaha (Applied Health & Edu. Psychology, Tulsa), resigned
October 2014; Barbara Miller (Library); Bob Hunger (Entomology and Plant Pathology); Mark Neer
(Center for Veterinary Health Sciences); Bob Terry (Emeriti Associate); and Stephen Clarke (Human
Sciences & Nutrition).
Topics
The three major topics examined this year were:



Same-sex partner benefits.
Shared Sick Leave Pool for employees across the University.
Tuition Waiver Benefits for Dependents of OSU employees.
Same-Sex Partner Benefits. During the Fall, the R& FB Committee discussed how to move
forward with a recommendation for benefits for same-sex partners employed at OSU. However, the U.S.
Supreme Court ruling in October 2014 made this a non-issue and OSU began offering benefits equally to
all those who held a state-issued marriage license. The background and rationale for this is as follows:
The Federal Court had struck down Oklahoma’s ban on same sex marriage, which was then appealed to
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. The 10th Circuit Court upheld the right to marry in
Oklahoma (and also Utah), and in October 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from
the State of Oklahoma. This let stand the Appeals Court ruling, and same-sex couples began to marry in
Oklahoma. In granting equal benefits, O.S.U. is complying with state law as defined by the 10th Circuit
Court. The related matter of “domestic partner” benefits, meaning un-married couples regardless of
whether they are same-sex or not, is still a discussion point for the Committee in the upcoming year.
Shared Sick Leave Pool. The Committee discussed the merits of a Shared Sick Leave Pool in
which an employee might donate their unused sick leave to a pool that could then be used by another
employee who had used up their sick leave due to catastrophic illness. These discussions of the R & FB
Committee included Meghann O’Harrah, Chair of the Policy, Benefits and Budget committee of the Staff
Advisory Council. In November, Rita Miller met with Jamie Payne, Associate V.P. of Human
Resources to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this possibility. Based on previous HR
reviews of sick leave, it appears that there are only a limited number of OSU employees who would
benefit from such a program, i.e most do not use up all of their sick leave each year. There are also
several large personnel requirements necessary to implement such a program, including health privacy
concerns. This topic has been “tabled” for the 2014-2015 year, but may be revisited at a later date.
Tuition Waiver Benefits. Throughout the year, the R & FB Committee discussed the possibility of a
tuition waiver program for the dependents of faculty and staff here at OSU. In December of 2014, the
University of Oklahoma began offering a tuition waiver to the dependents of their faculty and staff. This
program is anticipated to cost OU approximately $1million annually. Eligibility for this benefit is tied to
enrollment of the dependent in OU’s sponsored medical insurance plan. The R & FB Committee believes
that tying the benefit to health insurance at OSU would be challenging due to the continued emphasis on
keeping insurance premium expenses as low as possible for the employee. An update on this from the R
& FB Committee was presented to the Faculty Council at the March 2015 meeting. The Committee
continues to discuss the many advantages to OSU of having a tuition waiver program. An alternative
tuition waiver proposal under consideration by the Committee would propose to allow for the transfer of
faculty and staff tuition credits to their dependents. These are tuition credits that are already provided by
the university to faculty and staff employees but are not often utilized by faculty with terminal degrees.
The R & FB Committee acknowledges this comes at a time that the University is facing a significant
potential budget cut resulting from the State of Oklahoma’s $611 million (as of May 2015) budget gap.
There are ongoing discussions to help identify possible inefficiencies in the benefits that might offset the
cost of the proposed tuition benefit.
j. Rules and Procedures: Ranji Vaidyanathan – No Report
k. Student Affairs and Learning Resources: Barney Luttbeg – Year End
Report/Update
Recommendation: Revision to 2-0208 Academic Affairs in regards to Ordering
Textbooks*
Activities of the Student Affairs and Learning Resources committee 2014-15




The committee was composed Glade Topham, Misty Smith, Quiying Wang, Pat Jordan,
AJ Harris, Emalee Williams, and Barney Luttbeg (chair)
Discussed the conversion to electronic student evaluations. Many of our questions were
addressed by Dr. Masters at the Faculty Council meeting on October 14, 2014.
Enquired Dean Tucker about student survey results indicating unfair treatment within
their Masters or PhD programs.
Submitted a recommended revision to the University Textbook ordering policy.
8. Reports of Liaison Representatives –
Emeriti Association: Russell Wright
Liaison Report for OSU Emeriti Association Jan-May 2015
By Russell Wright, President OSU Emeriti Association
The OSU Emeriti Association holds monthly dinner meetings normally on the first Monday of
the month in Click Hall of the Conoco Phillips Alumni Center at 6:00 P.M. A 30 to 40 minute
program is presented at each dinner meeting followed by a short Association business meeting.
There is a $15.00 per person charge for the meals and members are encouraged to bring invited
guests or prospective members. A Meet and Greet Social precedes the dinner starting at 5:20
P.M. in the Emeriti Suite. The Association will not have monthly meetings in July and August.
However, informal meetings at a local pizza place are planned for members who wish to meet in
the summer.
The Emeriti Association Council, including the elected officers and six elected council members,
holds a monthly governing meeting except for July and August. A committee and the Council
are in the process of reviewing the Association Constitution and Bylaws. The OSU Emeriti
Association website has been updated and is being maintained by member Zane Quible. The
website can be accessed at http://emeriti.okstate.edu. Correspondence with the Emeriti
Association can be made at emeriti.association@okstae.edu.
The Emeriti Association sponsors several interest groups for its members and invited guests: An
Investment Club that meets every two weeks in the Emeriti Suite in the Conoco Phillips Alumni
Center; an Emeriti Technology Group that meets every 2nd Wednesday of the month, usually in
the Institute for Teaching and Learning Excellence, a Making the Most of Retirement
Discussion Group that meets every 3rd Wednesday at the Stillwater Public Library, and a Movie
Review Discussion Group that normally meets one or two times a month in the Emeriti Suite.
The Association also sponsors a Travel Club for members and guests that organize two to three
one day travel excursions per year to interesting cultural or historical sites. Usually an Emeriti
three day trip to Branson is planned for the holiday season each year. The upcoming summer
trip it to attend a production of the River City Players in Tahlequah on July 18 with a planned
stop for a brunch at the Fin and Feather Resort.
Membership in the OSU Emeriti Association is open to all retired employees of OSU, spouses of
current and deceased Emeriti Members, retired federal employees associated with OSU, retirees
from other A&M institutions, Board of Regents retirees and other retirees with a significant
relationship to OSU may become members upon approval of the Emeriti Council.
Graduate Faculty Council: Brenda Smith
Graduate Faculty Council Liaison Report (update from April 23, 2015 meeting)




Council passed a resolution recommending that the Graduate College move forward with
drafting a policy for the 60 hour minimum doctoral degree. This policy will need to go
through the formal approval process next year.
The Academic Program Committee recommended that the Family Financial Planning
Graduate Certificate be changed from a 21 to an 18 hour degree which was approved.
Best practices documents for graduate program organizational structure and advisory
committees/ defenses were vetted at the Subject Matter Groups in the spring. Based on
feedback, some revisions will be made to the document related to who can attend the
defense due to some discipline-specific practices.
Council passed a resolution to align the dates for Graduate Faculty Membership renewal
with the post-tenure review process.
Women’s Faculty Council: Barbara Miller
Women’s Faculty Council has chosen a winner for the first annual Endowment Scholarship. The
$1000 award will be for the fall 2015 semester.
We will hold our final meeting of the year on Wed. May 13 at 3 pm in the library Browsing
Room
Our main topic will be elections of next year’s officers.
9. Old Business
10. New Business
11. Adjournment
Refreshments will be served at 2:45 p.m.
*Attached
Amended by
Passed
Failed
Recommendation No. 15-05-01-ASP
1.________________ ______
_________
Moved by: Academic Standards & Policies
2.________________ ______
_________
Seconded by:
3.________________ ______ _________
Passed
Title:
Tabled
Failed
4.________________ ______ _________
D2L Landing Page and Course Page change to include FERPA training for TA’s
The Faculty Council Recommends to President Hargis that:
In support of OSU Policy 2-0701 FERPA 2.08, the OSU D@L Landing Page and Course Page
should be changed to include a section that notifies instructors with TA’s added to their classes
in D2L that they are responsible for seeing that their TA’s have completed the FERPA training.
The reference to the Registrar’s web page on FERPA should be included in the section on the
Landing Page and Course Page.
Rationale:
In response to a recommendation from GPSGA, a working group with representatives from the
Graduate College, ITLE, IT, and the Office of the Registrar assessed a gap in FERPA training
pertaining to individuals who are assigned TA roles by instructors in D2L (potentially affecting
as many as 700 individuals from the Fall 2014 term—not all GTAs). To help address this gap,
the Graduate College and ITLE plan to incorporate FERPA training in the annual GTA
orientation. In addition, this proposal adds a FERPA awareness/compliance statement to D2L.
Amended by
Passed
Failed
Recommendation No. 15-05-02-ASP
1.________________ ______
_________
Moved by: Academic Standards & Policies
2.________________ ______
_________
Seconded by:
3.________________ ______ _________
Passed
Title:
Tabled
Failed
4.________________ ______ _________
Transition to an online Student Survey Instrument for Course Evaluations
The Faculty Council Recommends to President Hargis that:
The online SSI system be purchased from ScanTron with the following caveats and requests:
- discussions between faculty, staff and administration about the use of course and instructor
evaluations be initiated
- an implementation plan be presented to Faculty Council before the fall 2015 semester "
Rationale:
The OSU assessment and testing division wishes to move the existing paper-based course
evaluation system to an online environment in order to save time and paper. Two options for this
online functionality were investigated and ScanTron meets more of the criteria desired by OSU.
The University has tested this system in one department and a few other classes. Faculty
Council believes that additional discussion should take place concerning the way course
evaluations are administered and how the results are then used. An implementation plan for the
new online evaluation system should be in place prior to the fall ’15 semester so that an easier
campus-wide transition can be made to the new online environment.
Amended by
Recommendation No. 15-05-01-SALR
Passed
Failed
1.________________ ______
_________
Moved by: Student Affairs & Learning Resources 2.________________ ______
_________
Seconded by:
Passed
3.________________ ______ _________
Tabled
Failed
4.________________ ______ _________
Title: Revision to 2-0208 ACADEMIC AFFAIRS in regards to ORDERING TEXT
BOOKS
The Faculty Council Recommends to President Hargis that:
We recommend that the existing policy be revised.
Rationale:
The existing policy gives incorrect information about what state law is the basis of the policy. We have
corrected this error. We have also added one Procedure urging that electronic supplements to textbooks
should be cross-platform compatible and accessible to students with disabilities. This will help to
supplement the already good university policy on ADA compliance for textbooks.
Oklahoma State University Policy and Procedures
ORDERING TEXTBOOKS
2-0208
ACADEMIC
AFFAIRS
December 2007
POLICY
1.01 It is the intent of Oklahoma State University to utilize high quality instructional materials
and make the materials available to students in the most economical manner.
1.02
Oklahoma state law (70 O.S., Section 3241.1) requires:
A. Bookstores located on campus or bookstores which contract with the institution to
provide bookstore services to students:
1. provide students with the option of purchasing instructional materials that are
unbundled when possible, disclose to faculty and staff the costs to students of
purchasing instructional materials, and disclose publicly how new editions vary
from previous editions,
2. actively promote and publicize book buy-back programs, and
3. disclose retail costs for instructional materials on a per-course basis to faculty and
staff and make this information publicly available; and
B. Higher education faculty and staff members to consider the least costly practices in
assigning instructional materials for a course, such as adopting the least expensive edition
available when educational content is comparable as determined by the faculty and
working closely with publishers and bookstores to create bundles and packages if they
deliver cost savings to students.
1.03. No employee or department shall demand or receive any payment, loan, subscription,
advance, deposit of money, services or anything, present or promised, as an inducement for
requiring students enrolled at the institution to purchase specific textbooks or instructional
material required for coursework or instruction. An employee or department of an institution
may receive:
A. Sample copies of textbooks or instructional material, instructor copies of textbooks or
instructional material, or other instructional material, that are not to be sold by faculty,
staff, or bookstores;
B. Royalties or other compensation from sales of textbooks or instructional materials that
include the writing or work of the employee;
C. Honoraria for academic peer review of instructional materials; and
D. Training in the use of instructional materials and technologies. 2-0208.2
1.04. No instructional material vendor or bookstores located on campus or bookstores which
contract with the institution to provide bookstore services to students shall solicit higher
education faculty and staff members for the purpose of selling free review instructional materials
that have been provided by a publisher at no charge to the faculty or staff. Bookstores shall not
permit book wholesalers conducting buybacks on campus to accept review instructional
materials from faculty or staff. No bookstore shall engage in any trade of any instructional
material marked as or identified as free review instructional materials.
1.05 The library will provide access to required instructional materials for undergraduate
classes with large enrollments or expensive textbooks. These materials will be on reserve at the
library.
1.06 Academic department heads are responsible for providing liaison with the Bookstore. As
such, the head of the department should coordinate all aspects of ordering textbooks and course
supplies for the academic unit.
PROCEDURE
2.01. Selection of textbooks is a departmental function; therefore, the department head shall
coordinate all selection and procurement functions. Individual faculty members shall not place
orders for textbooks directly with the Bookstore. All original orders for textbooks and course
supplies through the Student Union Bookstore must include the manufacturer’s suggested retail
price for each required textbooks and must be signed by the department head. Any subsequent
changes or additions to the original orders shall be approved by the department head in writing.
2.02. If a textbook has been listed on the required list and the order has been processed, the
textbook cannot be canceled or deleted unless the Student Union Bookstore is unable to supply
sufficient quantities of the text or unless the class is canceled. In cases of the former exception,
the Student Union Bookstore will notify the head of the department by telephone and confirm the
notification in writing as quickly as possible so that alternate textbook decisions can be made.
2.03. All orders for textbooks will be finalized within the academic departments and
communicated to the Bookstore according to the published deadlines.
2.04. The department head will ensure that the same textbooks are used for multiple sections of a
course. (This is to ensure that students enrolled in different sections of the same course receive
essentially the same textbook information. Exceptions may be made upon approval of the
department head and dean for class sections where students differ significantly from normal
sections (i.e. special sections for majors or international students), or where an instructor's
teaching style or approach differs from the normal approach, (i.e. case study, modular, or
thematic designs). 2-0208.3
2.05 When electronic supplements to textbooks are used, efforts should be made to use items
that are cross-platform compatible and accessible to students with disabilities.
2.0506. Problems related to textbook and supply orders should be communicated through the
deprtment head to the Student Union Bookstore. It shall be the individual faculty meber’s
responsibility to report such problems directly to the department head and not to the Bookstore.
Revised:
August 1985
Revised and approved:
Council of Deans, October 11, 2007
OSU Board of Regents, October 26, 2007
Executive Team, December 2007